Given how 90% of the forum is in a mass hysteria on wether or not the shot was low, I decided to share my perspective on it. Maybe it will even be the be all and end all, I don't know. Let's find out. I've seen many here share still images or the actual video of the blow to come up with an answer. Most who post still images indicate that it is low, and most who share videos indicate that it is a clean and legal blow. Personally, I don't trust still images all that much, a punch's trajectory is way too fluid and ever changing to make a clear cut and shut case. In fact, as I was constantly watching the replay of the blow, it occurred to me that the shot was still moving slightly upwards after the impact, although it is very subtle. I think this gave off the impression that the blow was legal, which is why the vast majority here who use the video as evidence say so. Official rules state that anything below the beltine/hips is illegal, however hitting the beltine itself is not. So a shot that is say 30% above the beltine and 70% on the beltine is perfectly clean, as long as it doesn't go further downstairs. Which is not the case for what happened in the fight. No part of the punch was above the belt, and the knuckles were almost entirely 50-50 between the beltine and below it during the moment of impact. Making it an official low blow. As some have said, just because it didn't hit your genitals doesn't mean it's not low. Now, I can clearly see why people were upset with the ref's decision. Usyk was always accused to be more vulnerable to the body, and the blow was not low enough for me to clear that accusation, so the shot was enough to convince people that it was a genuine case of ''glass body''. The shot actually hit somewhere around the pelvis area, which while certainly no balls, is still a sensitive spot in the human anatomy, and as said before, Usyk's body isn't made of hard leather, which is why his reaction seemed so genuine as if it was a body shot. Also, similar cases to this one, if not more blatantly illegal, were passed off scot free and became official verdicts. It's easy to see why many thought that the blow was no big deal, given how many other similar instances have been handled. But this particular ref was not the one at fault here, it's the other refs and officials who permit seemingly minor offenses to occur that it has become ''no big deal'' to the general audience. That's my 2 cents, make of it what you will. Just try to be relatively civil with each other and don't make my thread into an Usyk vs Fury debacle, because some of you guys are passionate to the point that it actively ruins the discussion an unheathly amount of times.
